Current Obstacles to Fully Preparing Title 10 Forces for Homeland Defense and Civil Support

Abstract : The National Strategy for Homeland Security, The National Military Strategic Plan for the War of Terrorism, the Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support, numerous CONPLANS and DOD instructions, all reference the use of Title 10 forces INCONUS. However current law creates many obstacles to ensuring our active forces are fully prepared. During a crisis, the President and Secretary of Defense could authorize use of Title 10 forces. However, this "just in time" approach does not allow for the units assigned the opportunity to be fully trained to respond. I suggest that changes in law and policy are required to support the training needed to ensure our active forces are adequately prepared to defend against asymmetric threats in the US. In this paper, I will discuss the definitions and legal authority of Homeland Defense and Civil Support then explore the history and precedence of assigning forces to missions on U.S. soil. Also explored are the military forces available to respond to include National Guard, Coast Guard and Active Duty forces. I will review several case studies of where the military has been used INCONUS as well as look at plans and scenarios that may require the use of Title 10 in the future. Finally, I will provide recommendations that might be considered. We constantly prepare to fight the last war. We are now in a war unlike any we have fought, we must let go of the last war, embrace this one and make the changes needed militarily, politically and legally. No longer is our threat another state's military power on distant shores. It is against criminals that we call terrorists here at home. Criminals are normally fought within the law of our great nation but when the law prevents bringing the full force of our nation's capabilities against the enemy in this war, the law should be changed.